The Coastal Post - October 1999

Letters To The Editor


Stinson Beach Recreational Needs,

To Brian O'Neill, Superintendent,
Golden Gate National Recreation Area,
Re: Stinson Beach Community Recreation Fields

You and other representatives of the National Park Service have recently expressed commitments to "working together cooperatively and keeping the lines of communication open" with locally-elected officials and their communities. Stinson Beach welcomes this commitment and looks forward to working cooperatively with you.

The Recreation Element of the Stinson Beach Community Plan calls for "an area unfrequented by tourists, secure land suitable for use as a daytime play field and to develop a baseball diamond/soccer field..." This goal is generally compatible with GGNRA park purposes, and reflects the continuing interest of the Stinson Beach community.

With this letter we are reopening the dialog for locating a suitable site for community recreation fields in the Stinson Ranch (Gulch) area. Since our last discussions with the GGNRA in the 1980s and early '90s, the Stinson Beach community has acquired a proven record for the responsible acquisition, development and management of our popular town center park, the Village Green. Although the Village Green does have a basketball court, other community recreational needs are seriously lacking. The demand is even greater now due to the growth in popularity of soccer and softball among both our girls and boys, and in light of the countywide shortage of playing fields.

During its September 4 monthly meeting, the Stinson Beach Village Association voted unanimously to request permission from the GGNRA to initiate planning for the location of a community recreation field in the Stinson Ranch (Gulch) area. As it is with the Stinson Beach Village Green, our community would be fully responsible for management, maintenance and overall stewardship of the community fields in concert with GGNRA guidelines.
Cindy Adler, Roger Hurt, Andrea DiMarco, Richard Reasoner
Stinson Beach Village Association

Fairfax Alert

The Fourth Amendment states: "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated."

Here in Fairfax our Town Council appears to be embarking on a course with a tree ordinance No. 679 that punches holes in our Fourth Amendment.

When the council approves the ordinance, the Fairfax Public Works Director will have the right to enter private property uninvited, without permission, to make inspections. He also has the authority to arrest and cite anyone who violates this ordinance. Cutting a tree, shrub or plant on Town or private property without obtaining a permit subjects one to a nuisance charge. Applying for a permit to plant, remove or alter a tree in your back yard requires the Town to inventory and locate trees and bushes on the subject's land.

Every tree removed requires three trees of replacement on the site or within two miles of the removal location. Violations of this ordinance provide the Town the avenue to place a lien or special assessment against the property.

Big Brother is watching. You may believe working in your garden without a permit is your right. You are in for a rude awakening. The uninvited intrusions on private property by the Public Works Director conjures all sorts of problems.

All facets of our Constitution are important. We must not yield our sovereignty to the agencies who serve us. The people must insist on remaining in control over the instruments they have created. Failing to participate in government can only lead to watered-down versions of our liberties, with the inevitability that those who govern, will rule. Our Third World countries struggling for freedom are a good example of what could happen to us.

Contact your Town Council and attend the upcoming council meetings and let your voices be heard. Our freedoms are precious. Get involved now.
Stanley Schriebman
Fairfax

Unlawfully Imprisoned

Hello again, via letter. Writing from the ASHes now. I'm including the two-page "To Fellow People..." [see Columns] as an overlapping vague update on what I have already sent to the Coastal Post in the past, still in the "blind," not knowing if any of this is getting run in the paper, hoping. This addition does also express some broader political view besides the facts of the sorrowful assault by the State's agents on one of us people.

This place, Atascadero State "Hospital" Prison is one of the sickest institutions that any could imagine, in ways that are not easily describable. You'd first have to be able to try to realize what it's like to NOT have any rights as far as the State is concerned, when push comes to their shoving, and then try to imagine the vilest possible intrusions upon your mind and body if certain things happen. The odious hypocrisy of the "Drug War" reaches its pit at this obvious exhibition of such Government drug pushers' haven of the corporate State, which they ("doctors") are now doing, against all of God's will and my own will and rights as a Man. The heinous idiots are ruling cruelly.

You cannot imagine being imprisoned without any rights and no probable cause for such imprisonment let alone a "trial" and any unlikely "conviction" when there is no just cause, yet all law and rights are booted out the door, and so one is under "Judgment" by more State agents, who do NOT want to hear the truth about their fellow "doctors" and the "court," so that by extension not only of the foul "court" order which sent me here, but by the negative influence of such, the heinous imprisonment and such continues, effected and carried out by other agents of the State. Professional integrity lacks in major ways, for way too many so-called "professionals" by such failings have more influence on other people's lives than any civilized standard would dream of allowing. To use a punitive pun without any cause having been shown for punitive action (re: "punishment") to be used, that about sums it up in a nutshell.
Mark Andrew Hall
Unlawfully Imprisoned by Officious Criminals
Atascadero State "Hospital" Prison

Guns Tobacco And Religion

What do the gun industry, tobacco companies, and religious right have in common besides hypocrisy? Flawed logic; self-interest ahead of common good; secrecy.
Ron Lowe
Nevada City, CA

Stein Attack On Miller

Phil Stein of New York, in his letter to the editor that was published in the September issue of the Post, shoots from the hip in his attack on Ed Miller's enlightening and truthful article on Libya (July 1999) and due to his shortsightedness, misses his target. I will not explore the reasons why I think many Jews really believe that they must muzzle all criticism of other Jews who act or speak on issues that are not acceptable in civilized societies. I will, however, caution that when any ethnic or religious group continually defends the deliberate questionable behavior of its members it is certain that others will eventually rise up in strong opposition. It is strange that Jews are quick to use the term "anti-Semitic" to stifle all criticism of unacceptable behavior without realizing that in doing so they are building up an inevitable explosion of anti-Jewish sentiments.

Being a Muslim of Arab descent I am exposed to the daily discrimination and name-calling that Jews, Asians, Africans, Native Americans, Poles, Irish, Italians, and other groups were exposed to at different stages of American history. Much of this discrimination is still prevalent in our so-called "enlightened" society. The fact is that all other groups, including Arabs and Muslims, seldom defend the outrageous conduct by members of their respective communities. Most Jews, on the other hand, are driven by a strong compulsion to label their critics as "anti-Semitic." an inappropriate term since Arabs, too, are Semites.

Stein should be alarmed by Miller's comments concerning Martin Indyk, an Australian Jew that was in the service of former Israeli prime minister Yitzhak Shamir. He was rushed to the US and within mere weeks of his arrival was pronounced a citizen of the US by Bill Clinton waiving all requirements that are imposed on others. This was done in order for Clinton to pay off one of his many debts to the Jews who later boasted that they contributed 60% of Clinton's first presidential election campaign during which he announced publicly that if he were elected President the White House kitchen would become a kosher kitchen. Clinton then suspiciously appointed Indyk as the US Ambassador to Israel with total disregard to the apparent conflict of interest.

Stein alleges that Miller failed to provide a fuller perspective by naming only Jews in his article. I re-read the piece and found that Miller also criticized former National Security Advisor John Poindexter, and made an admonishing comment about Ferdinand Marcos. He also named George Bush, Ronald Reagan, the FBI, CIA, NATO, and former White House spokesman Marlin Fitzwater. These were all the key players and actors known to Miller. No criticism was made by Miller of others since none were as closely connected with this scandalous act perpetuated by our government, and undoubtedly in the primary interest of Israel and at the behest of those sixty percenter Jews that effectively hold our Congress and President in a stranglehold over the issue of US foreign policy (sic) in the Middle East.

Stein also should express concern for the crazed anti-Arab, anti-Muslim comments by the infamous Steven Emerson, who has been exposed a number of times for his misleading and fabricated reporting of alleged Arab and Muslim conspiracies and acts of violence. Emerson is an admitted supporter of Israel. To him, Israel can do no wrong. Can Indonesia's President Habibie or the Palestinian dictator Yassir Arafat do no wrong?

I urge Phil Stein and other seemingly blinded Jews to stop defending their Martin Indyks and Steven Emersons and also expose their hidden agendas. I urge them to also publicly condemn the fact that Israel legally approves torture and death squads. Condemn, too, the cruel, barbaric, and sadistic treatment of Palestinians by the Israelis: beatings, killings and hootings, assassinations, snipers, up to two years arrest and imprisonment under inhuman conditions without warrant or being charged with a crime, no due process of law, the use of a horrific type of potentially fatal tear gas, the demolition of thousands of homes, uprooting of hundreds of thousands of income and subsistence providing citrus and olive trees and crops, theft of homes, property, and land; water deprivation and the forbiddance of Arabs to drill water wells, gross and continued violation of human rights that according to US laws should forbid US aid to Israel (but does not), the teaching of their children to hate Arabs who are likened to animals worthy of slaughter, and above all, the commission of crimes against humanity that are yet to be punished.

Jews should rather be concerned that every Israeli prime minister had/has blood on their hands, yet those folks in Washington, dazed by very large contributions of money from Jews, welcomed these miscreants on American soil. The present prime minister of Israel, Ehud Barak, does not deny that he dressed up in women's clothing and as a member of an Israeli death squad assassinated two Arabs in the streets in cold blood.

Likewise, as an Arab and Muslim, I publicly condemn and protest allowing the likes of every Arab and Muslim ruler and dictator that institutes torture against their citizenry or who violate their human rights, from stepping on American soil. If we Arabs and Muslims can speak so boldly why can't Jews? Who is the better of us? In the Holy Quran we are all told that God created into different tribes and nations so that we will all come to know one another and that the best among us are the most righteous. Islam also teaches Muslims that anyone that wrongfully takes the life of one human being is like murdering all of humankind, and anyone who saves one human life is like saving all of humankind. Surely there are similar parallels in the Old Testament.
Yousef Salem - 408-736-3555

Ehud Barak, Shalom,

We have voted for you, and we are glad we did.

You promised to bring a comprehensive peace with all our neighbors-Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese-and we believe that you really want that.

You promised to achieve the decisive breakthrough on all these tracks within a year and a half, and this proves that you have drawn the lesson from the experience of your predecessors. You have taken to heart the rule that says 'an abyss cannot be crossed in two jumps.'

We are convinced that you will apply yourself to this task with energy, courage and logic.

But, Mr. Prime Minister, we are worried by the peace plan that you have in mind, and that is reflected in the 'red lines' proclaimed by you. Even if you do succeed to impose a plan like that on the Palestinians, by exploiting the present superiority of Israel, such a peace will not last 'for generations.'

Not only the political attitudes of the Palestinian people must be taken into account, but also their feelings, anxieties and hopes. To ignore these would be a serious mistake.

We do not need a 'permanent settlement', and we need real peace.

Real peace cannot be based on a border that tears away further territory from the West Bank and the Gaza Strip, which together amount for only 22% of mandatory Palestine. The Green Line must be the basis of peace.

Real peace cannot come into being, if 'settlement blocs' will be stuck like daggers into the body of the Palestinian state. The settlements, situated as they are on the land and water reserves of the State of Palestine, will serve as a daily reminder of a diktat imposed by force.

Either peace or settlements. You can't have both.

Real peace cannot be created while the occupation of the Palestinian part of Jerusalem continues, cutting the inhabitants of the West Bank off from their economic, social and religious center. Jerusalem must be the capital of both Israel and Palestine.

Moreover, the fate of Jerusalem does not concern the inhabitants of this country only. Hundreds of millions of Arabs, a billion Muslims will never reconcile themselves to Israeli rule over the holy mosques. Jerusalem has also a unique importance for hundreds of millions of Christians, members of dozens of different churches on five continents. Trying to maintain exclusive Israeli rule over Jerusalem is a provocation to the whole world.

Peace is real if the great majority on both sides accepts it wholeheartedly as a fair compromise. The logic of the brain is not enough, the logic of the heart is needed too.

Mr. Prime Minister, you are now making history. Do not miss the opportunity!
Gush Shalom
pb 3322
Tel-Aviv 61033
website: www.gush-shalom.org; email: [email protected]
(Reprint, Haaretz, Israel, Friday, July 30, 1999)

Borello: Outvoted, Not Disenfranchised

It was scuzzy of you to print Judy Borello's latest screed on affordable housing in Pt. Reyes. If Charlie Morgan is a "sniveler," then J.B. is an alcohol-pushing pig (it is our #1 drug of abuse, you know). What Judy and Jeanette don't get is that it's precisely because of selfish minds like theirs that neighbors DON'T get a "vote" for or against projects. They get to participate in the planning process (along with others that they would exclude). That process (Community Plan, Coastal Act, etc.) CALLS FOR just what EAH is bringing, and even suggests the Giacomini site! J&J;, you weren't disenfranchised, you were OUTVOTED by a landslide. This last-ditch radical NIMBYism is a disgrace to our town. Of course, if you narrow the opinion field to the most immediate neighbors, you'll always get a higher NIMBY "vote." No one who matters will be fooled. And we certainly don't need more drug-dealer businesses here either.
Herbert Goldbern
Point Reyes Station
Dear Neighbors In The Valley

In a recent letter to the community, Supervisor Steve Kinsey acknowledged and practically celebrated the emergence of the French Ranch development. He went on to say that the "community debate, permitting, and legal challenges" have ended. As many of us well know, this is not the case. The debate continues, not only in the Valley but now in Pt. Reyes. Soon, other parts of rural Marin will be subject to accelerated development due to the use of large flow communal waste systems instead of individual septic systems which have been the standard in the past. Communal systems mean more houses, more money for the developer, and more impact on infrastructure.

The French Ranch development is nearly twice as big (31 lots, 33 units) as it would have been if left to depend on individual septic systems. It was Supervisor Kinsey, acting as consultant to the school, and a handful of Valley folks who engineered the merging of the Lagunitas School with French Ranch. The school did not need the French Ranch partnership in order to repair its ailing septic system, they had enough land, and money was available from State grants. French Ranch needed the school in order to show a public benefit, to make its community septic system possible, thereby setting a precedent for future development. Today the school is operating near bankruptcy, exacerbated by the delays caused by joining with French Ranch. They are using an experimental sand filter system in violation of the County's Cease and Desist Order issued March 1, 1999, a system that hasn't even passed a final inspection and has been problematic (an equipment failure and raw sewage spill on 2/9/99).

In regard to open space, the truth is the French Ranch developer was mandated by law to only develop 5% of the land and retain 95% as open space (public or private). He chose to avoid taxes and upkeep by donating it to the County of Marin. Furthermore, part of the agricultural land that Kinsey proudly mentioned is located over septic leach fields, limiting what can actually be grown there. As for the maximum square footage per house, it was set at 4000, hardly in keeping with the Valley's average home size. Even as this letter is written, two-thirds of the permit fees for houses now under construction at French Ranch remain unpaid and we taxpayers are, in effect, loaning the developer the money to proceed.

Small wonder that so many people are angered by the appearance of the large French Ranch homes in their midst and the sewage precedent it sets for all of rural Marin. Supervisor Kinsey must be blinded by his own pride in accomplishment if he insists, as his letter states, that these homes will not be visible. Numerous houses are clearly visible from the school property and elsewhere. Luckily, there are many of us who care deeply about this valley and wish to preserve its wildlands, creeks, and the peaceful lifestyle it still affords all of us. If community septic systems are allowed to become the blueprint for the future, then rural Marin as we know it will disappear. Call 721-4755 to help and call the Board of Supervisors (499-7331), Senator Barbara Boxer (403-0100), and Rep. Lynn Woolsey (507-9554) to let them know you don't want more large scale development to spread over this magical place.
M. J. Anderson, Phil Arnot, Richard Bradshaw, Ken Brierley, Patricia Kriegler, Ralph Morris, Michael Sewell, Richard Sloan, Brian Staley, Paul Stimler, Laura Szawarzenski
This letter was written by committee. Information here was sourced from public records. As of the writing of this letter, we believe all information to be true and accurate.

Bring Back Cuban Cigars!

Reopening the Western Union office in Havana is not enough. Who cares what the archaic reasons are for our trade embargo with Cuba? It has been nearly 40 years and the embargo has achieved nothing except to have us smoking surrogate knockoff Cuban cigars, cigars grown from Cuban seed, cigars grown in Cuba's neighbor, the Dominican Republic, cigars hand-rolled by Cuban expatriates, cigars grown within missile range of Cuba, etc.

Trust me, my consumption is totally unprincipled. As I always say, "Why bother masking market morality with lofty hollow rhetoric?" I buy my gasoline from the swine circuses of the world; I buy my tracks shoes and trendy clothes from the sweatshops of the world; I buy my plastic action figures from China. My hamburger and out-of-season fruit comes from slashed and burned rain forests that used to shelter Indian tribes and endangered species.

Now then, why am I being force-fed an ethical option when it comes to my choice of smoldering carcinogens and nicotine delivery systems? I am tired of paying black market prices for Cuban stogies. I do not want to be held hostage by some romantic, trite, Cold War ideology. Nor do I want to be the indirect victim of moldering special interest legislation, passed on behalf of vengeful American imperialists who lost their holdings when Castro liberated Cuba from the invisible hand.

Our economy has never been better. There has never been a better time to totally pander to the promptings of unbridled consumerism. End the embargo! I want Cuban soot and tar in my lungs and I want it yesterday!
Jeffrey R. Smith
Alameda

No Longer "The Land Of The Free"

The United States has a bigger percentage of its citizens behind bars, in jail or prison, than any other nation on Earth except Russia. They also have six to 10 times as many of their citizens per 100,000 behind bars as most of the other industrialized nations on Earth.

It hasn't always been that way. According to a Bureau of Justice Statistics Report, at mid-1998 there were an estimated 1.8 million people in jails and prisons in the U.S.; at the end of '85, only a little over 12 years earlier, the figure was 744,208. Thus there was well over a 100% increase in little over 12 years.

Also, according to the Bureau of Justice Statistics, the U.S. prison rate, which for 50 years had held steady at about 110 per 100,000 residents, skyrocketed between 1980 and 1990 to 450 per 100,000 residents. What could have caused such a great increase?

Could it be partly because in 1980 the U.S. Supreme Court outlawed the teaching the Ten Commandments in our public schools while the other countries of the world allowed such teaching? (Our whole civilized society is based mostly on five of those Ten Commandments.)

If this Supreme Court decision didn't at least partly, if not mostly, cause this enormous increase and the enormous difference in the percentage of people behind bars in this country, compared to other countries, what did?

If this Supreme Court decision is not overturned, how long will this very rapid increase in the percentage of U.S. citizens who are behind bars continue?
Stephen Tarver
Gillette, Wyoming

School-Sponsored Corporations

What's happening!? Aren't schools supposed to emulate a sense of responsibility, of choice, of healthy habits and even a bit of good sense? The recent action by a Bay area school board to switch on-campus selling of one brand of soft drink for another brand seems to contradict much of what education should stand for.

As for the School Board's motive-"We need the money!"-who's fooling whom? Drinks aren't free. The rain of coins fed into the machines, whether earned by students cutting lawns or baby-sitting or as school money from parents, probably totals more than twice the amount the Board finally gets. Not a very efficient way to finance a legitimate need for education money.

An acceptable school board might allow but never sponsor soft drink vending on campus. A concerned and enlightened board, however, could heed the advice of most pediatricians who contend that a few ccs of dilute red wine is better than milk for children past nursing age. The same doctors vehemently oppose the sugar content of most soft drinks-for anyone, at any age.

So, school board members, teachers, parents and especially students old enough to look toward being treated as adults, don't catch yourselves in a vending machine trap of your own construction.
Howard Waite
Inverness

The Origins Of Emotinal Numbness

It seems an American cultural phenomenon to me that I almost never see a man cry. The forces that compelled me to resolve within myself as a boy in the fifth grade that I would never cry again at school must have been monumental. It strikes me as being analogous to one deciding to never laugh in public, so that whenever the urge to laugh comes on, he must exert all his will power to suppress it.

For me, the habit of suppressing the desire to cry in elementary school subsequently carried over to other emotional expressions, i.e., I've learned to stuff my feelings. I supposed it takes a lot of energy for me to stifle the natural urge to cry.

My fifth grade resolution was based on my arrival at the conclusion that crying was soft, weak and contemptible. Now the habit of holding back tears has tragically progressed for me into an inhibition of almost any strong feeling, even happiness!

The prospect of letting myself "break down" and cry in public is horrifying to me even if in front of just one person!

Could crying really be that shameful? Is this some sort of American white male syndrome that I have fallen under?
Keith Bramstedt
San Anselmo

Sanctions Hurt The Innocent

Thanks to Edward W. Miller and Karen Nakamura in past articles for revealing the truth behind our relationship with Iraq.

Regarding the recent news on the doubling of deaths of Iraq's children, it is inconceivable to me how the American people can remain silent for so long about the horrors we have perpetrated on the people of Iraq. Since 1991, Iraq has been (mal)functioning on approximately one-tenth of its normal pre-1991 economy, primarily due to the total economic sanctions imposed by the U.S. using the cover of the UN. Humanitarian aid is of very little avail. Would the people of California be able to feed themselves and heal themselves if they were stumbling along on only one-tenth of their economy? Of course not. And suppose some humanitarian aid trickled in. Would that help? Not much. Saddam Hussein may be to blame for diverting some or even most of the aid, but the vast manifestation of hunger, malnutrition, disease and death are due squarely to our total economic sanctions.

U.S. politicians and the media have stifled discussion, debate, information and action regarding our imposition of total economic sanctions on Iraq. Every day, in every newspaper around the world, there should be a box on the front page above the fold saying: "U.S. murdered 150 Iraqi children today via total economic sanctions. American public still silent as sheep."

Our total economic sanctions have not and will not deter Saddam Hussein from building a war machine or developing weapons of mass destruction or using either. But it is certain that the sanctions are decimating an entire generation of Iraqis. Total economic sanction is the worst weapon of mass destruction of all, and we are actually using it against the Iraqi people.

Our "humanitarian aid" is ineffectual and a slap in the face of a suffering people. Iraq needs its economy back in order to feed itself. And that means we have to lift the sanctions.
Daniel H. Stone
San Francisco

Disapproves Leon Property Development

To: Ted Carr, Planner, Marin County Community Development Agency
Re: Leon Coastal Permit Application, Design Review Exemption

My husband and I have lived in Bolinas for over 15 years, and own property which borders the parcels owned by Mr. Leon. During this time we have had contact with Mr. Leon several times, each time renewing our realization that Mr. Leon has no regard for Bolinas.

We are concerned with Mr. Leon's proposed development of his property. When we first met Mr. Leon, he expressed his complete disregard and contempt for the Marin County Planning Department and others when he told us, "I don't need water, power or septic, and as for permits, money talks!"

I see now he wishes to fence in a large portion of the drainage swale which exists in the block bordered by Elm, Juniper, Alder and Iris roads. Ecologically, this is a delicate area, and becomes a swamp during the rainy season, lasting well into late April (to the point it cannot be traversed on foot), and as such, is a spawning area for many of our local frogs. I am in possession of a copy of his proposed fence and buildings. Although he shows a simple layout, he shows he has no consideration of the local drainage characteristics when he plans a garden in the middle of a swamp! I am also concerned that he has plans at all for a garden anywhere on his property, as he has already shown by his existing plantings which have died from neglect that he is not able to maintain even these few trees and bushes he planted earlier this year! His parcel has either too much water, or not enough! Where does he expect to acquire water for this planting? Why does he plan an aviary on his property? Who will care for the birds? For what use does he wish a "platform," let alone a "platform" of that size? Interestingly enough, it is the size one might wish for an illegal trailer!
Lynn Lightfoot
Bolinas

Legal vs. Illegal Drugs

As an outsider, my observations may light the "drug issue" from other angles. Here is one example: Millions of American dollars are spent on prescription drugs by Americans each year. The word "prescription" indicates in your culture a pharmacological substance recommended by a person trained, tested and permitted to make such recommendations. Accordingly, these prescriptions are one of the ways the "prescribers" collect these American dollars. Usually the prescriber of such substances examines the candidate for such a recommendation to evaluate which "medicine" to prescribe.

The world at large as well as your culture have stress inculcated in its inhabitants from infancy onward. The effects of this stress are many and varied, thus the medicines for the treatments are equally many and varied. All this is a cultural process. Among you there are persons who perform the examination upon theirselves and make their own recommendation as to a remedial substance. Your culture does not recognize such examinations as valid, thus with the exception of certain "over-the-counter" medicines, self-determined pharmacological substances are not available without prescriptions.

To further complicate this, not all these pharmacological substances are "prescribable." Most of the prescribable substances are what may be called "inventions." These inventions are manufactured predominately by colossal companies, sometimes referred to as "empires." These companies manufacture these inventions if permitted by your/their government. So in a sense, that government dispenses medicines by permit. The relationship of that government and parties with permits is exclusive. Excluded from outside interest they become an "it." It regulates prices and output of specific substances: therefore it is by definition a cartel, a cartel with a more than usual degree of control.

Since a member of the cartel is a governing body, it is possible for it to legislate competition out of existence. As a policy, this might succeed, were it not for the independently poor. The poor, receiving little, having little, find their independence burdensome at times and without the wherewithal to obtain remedial substances, resort to substitutes, or in some cases make or grow their own. "It" does not "permit" these activities. It could be called an "advanced cartel."

The poor who show enterprise in these activities earn the title counter-culture Currently, "it" is exerting great energy in eradicating the independently poor enterprising enough to go into the pharmacological substance field.

The government's revenue as the result of taxes upon the prescriptions are immense. By criminalizing the independent invention, use or distribution of these substances, the government enters an area that by its own definition is in violation of the law, i.e., conflict of interest. There is an argument here that we can get lost in. Let us rather deal with a separate element, that of dogma. In dogma, a division is made between two elements or more. One or more elements are acceptable, one or more are not, by a standard acceptable to an arbiter. In this case, the government is the arbiter and therein lies the conflict. In the past century, the governments of this country have granted themselves greater and greater control over the sale and possession of such substances, never more so than now. At no time was the pharmacological industry not present or felt in the legislature. The independently poor were not present, but felt in those proceedings.

In the past, there was little need to outlaw or discredit something unless it was dangerous. Therein is another argument. What is dangerous? Abuse can be dangerous. Abuse is the exception to use. It damages or depletes or renders useless. The regulation by permit of the dispensing of substances subject to abuse was thought to be an effective way of obtaining control to minimize that abuse. The effects of the pharmacological substances under examination here are those that induce in their users such states as calmness rather than distress, stimulation rather than depression. Some produce euphoria, a state held to be desirable by most who have experienced it. As one result of technology, the stretch from rich to poor is far greater than a century ago. So in a way, the poor have less now, less of what is available. Consequently, the circumstance of the poor contains greater stress. Thus there is in the poor a greater desire for calmness, stimulation and euphoria. Still lacking the wherewithal but possessing the need and desire, they are impelled to acquire the wherewithal. Money will get them the substance, for then they can buy it. But if money is harder to get than the substance, how will they get it? Some of the substances mentioned are not available even by prescription, but are available counter-culturally. Thus the poor, out of need, desire and stress are directed toward what is called the counter-culture.

All users of unprescribed pharmacological substances that affect the mood of the user with the exception of alcohol are violating the law of this country. The proportions of the present campaign against the possessors of these substances are those of a war. The element referred to as the counter-culture, though feeling the pressure against it in this war, has not brought arms against those warring against it. The war is waged by an armed, organized, financed group using force, confiscation of property, and imprisonment against a disorganized, relatively poor and relatively unarmed group that does not use force or imprisonment. Without realizing it, America has declared war against itself.

The church has entered this war as well. It is worth mentioning that many of the churches in this country espouse the words of a man called Christ. Among the sayings attributed to that man is "The poor we shall always have with us." If that saying describes a world truth as these churches declare, then it is pointless to try and get rid of or wage war on poverty. If in fact the government is sincerely interested in preventing the abuse of these substances, it is not illogical that it try to do so as it has with other substances subject to abuse, through regulation of availability and cost to the consumer. The current campaign is precipitating an atmosphere of anxiety among the people of this country, thereby increasing the consumption of the said substances. War is failure, no matter what form it takes. There is a permissible form of war, it is called a game. In a game, no one is killed, maimed, injured, imprisoned against their will. This war against a mass of people within a republic is oppressive. It divides the country, it sets the people against the people, not against criminals. It has created an atmosphere of foreboding among a significant portion of the populace, the work force, the taxpayers. Among a people questing peace and a recognizable creator, the results of doctrines that demand condemnation are disastrous. Like rodents attempting to escape from a maze, the quest itself becomes the vehicle of hope. Escape becomes the focus, captivity the condition, captors the cause. Animals grow more docile as they age and accept captivity more readily. There are millions of young Americans that do not and are not, so it is war against the poor and the young.
SKYE LE PANTO

Ignorant Or Crooked

To: Rep. Curt Weldon
Re: Center for Strategic and International Studies

Your statements on C-Span, September 20, show your lack of knowledge of history and our lack of intelligence on the subject.

This is embarrassing to the public.

You accused several nations of the transfer of military technology. However, are you not familiar with the transfer of technology to Iraq by the U.S. during the Iraq/Iran war?

It is depressing to the citizens to hear a representative of the people making the type of statements that you make.

The U.S. overthrew a democratic government in Iran and instituted Shah Pavlavi, who murdered 45,000 people there who did not go along with his regime supported by the U.S. for the purposes of securing U.S. multi-nationals in Iran. When Iranians overthrew the Shah, the U.S. supported Iraq in order to get back ground for U.S. multi-nations in Iran.

Why don't you go back to school and learn the history about which you are talking? Talking about unfairness as you do, it was unfair that the U.S. overthrew a democratic government in Iran and supported and colluded with the genocide of thousands in East Timor by the Indochina military to secure U.S. multi-nationals such as AT&T;, Phillips Petroleum, et al.

We are wondering why we have to continually reinvent policy here because of the ignorance of our elected representatives. The attitude of representatives suggests that you are either ignorant or crooked.

Speaking of crookedness, we taxpayers resent supporting the military in order to secure multi-nationals.

We also do not appreciate your spreading paranoia about spying at nuclear labs in this country. Most labs are in universities which have always encouraged the exchange of scientists and ideas, even as far back as German nuclear scientists brought into this country after WWII.
Olga Goldsmith
San Rafael

MGH: Callous and Preemptory Approach

I mailed off this evening a letter which spoke of the devastating experiences I'd had when a member of my family passed on while at Marin General.

The letter was written several days ago. The same day, that afternoon, I ran into one of the three chaplains who was present at the hospital, who sat with me and generously consoled me during the 72-hour vigil on "Five East" (the last place one finds oneself in extremis). Certainly, it was a strange coincidence; it was a blessing to see the chaplain again, inasmuch as I'd "confessed" that I'd experienced guilt over the way in which I'd handled the events.

I thanked the man for coming to my rescue. He was the only comrade I had during the battles I had with Marin General's administrative arm, namely, the charge nurse, or administrative nurse, and a woman from Hospice's business offices.

At the time I met the nurse and the Hospice representative, I was asked by one, or both-I forget all the details-to accompany them to a room used as a place to rest, nap, etc., for relatives and friends of terminally ill patients on Five East.

Since I'd decided to have all life-saving measures discontinued, and that my mother would receive oxygen and water, but nothing beyond that with the exception of pain killers, if needed, the representative from Hospice and the administrative nursing representative for Marin General informed me that my decision (under Durable Power of Attorney) made my family member no longer eligible for hospital care. I was informed that I had 24 hours to make other plans, have my family member removed to a nursing home facility, and had to come up with $2000 in cash, check or otherwise, hand that over to the nursing representative, or perhaps the Hospice business representative.

One of the women (forget which at this remove in time) accompanied me back to the hospital room. I'd said she could do so, could listen in on my communication with my mother. On no account was this representative, of either the hospital or Hospice, to say a word. Nothing.

I explained to my mother the situation, and said there was absolutely no choice in the matter.

The woman who accompanied me to the room got up from her chair, came over to the bed, and explained what I'd communicated.

The chaplain was in the room, just happened to walk in. I told him he was welcome.

I demanded that the woman get the hell out of the room, and out of the hospital, and she left. I informed two visitors (family friends) that they were not welcome. They must likewise either leave, or wait.

The chaplain put my words into action. He saw that everyone left, and no one was permitted back in the room.

The interesting thing about my meeting this priest the other day was his comment that I was the only person, in his entire time as a chaplain for the hospital, who'd stood up to the administration.

He'd seen husbands, wives, brothers, cousins, etc., say and do nothing when confronted with similar demands and intrusions.

This is not meant to be a letter about me. It is indicative of the callous and preemptory approach on the part of Hospice and Marin General officials who, in the very difficult circumstances people are faced with, overlook human issues of kindness and compassion.
Eric Wik
San Rafael

Kinsey And Development

We received a form letter from Supervisor Kinsey. Mostly he was patting himself on the back for his success in allowing the developing of French Ranch. He also said this would most likely be the only development in the Valley, contradicting himself when he was quoted a few months ago warning the Valley residents to be ready for 800 homes! If he intends to refuse future Valley development, he will lose in court. By the reversing of a 50-year "no development policy" with the approval of French Ranch and by allowing a communal septic system, he has set a precedent that cannot be reversed. A developer will just have to make the same deal the French Ranch made; the court will not turn him down. Also, this opens up many areas OK'd for development that are not financially practical to develop because of the expense of individual septic systems or have the same problem that French Ranch has that the soil is not permeable enough for a septic tank.

I am beginning to wonder how much the French Ranch investors were helped by Kinsey. I am a full-time computer technician and do not believe in coincidences. These investors have been trying to get French Ranch development approved for many years. Suddenly Kinsey comes from nowhere, becomes a supervisor and French ranch is approved, as well as all opposition to the Buck Center dropped. He also is pushing through a bike bridge at the Ink Wells that the homeowners around do not want and only bikers voted for. The Ink Wells are a nuisance with the drugs, vandalism (No Parking county street signs are pulled out as well as Private signs), broken glass, garbage, fights, noise, illegal parking, graffiti-needles and razor blades have been found there! The Ink Wells are listed on the Web on at least three locations, one as a gay nude beach! The Ink Wells are on private property; some people are under the impression they are on public property. The bridge will add even more attention to an already big problem.

I understand that Kinsey was working with the French Ranch investors before running for Supervisor. This brings up some questions. Because of the trouble they were having getting approval, did Kinsey suggest to these investors that asking for 33 homes will not work, that they need to ask for 300 homes, privately expecting 33 homes? Did he suggest that his way the people of the Valley will think that they are getting the better of the developer? Did he also suggest that they should "bribe" someone, make a deal with the desperate Lagunitas School, with a septic system, assuring the support of the school and the supervisors? Did he also suggest to them to call the "state-required, low-income housing" elderly, low-income housing to also get the support of Valley residents?

Now what really worries me is the golf course. I see very few people on it, and I have talked to golfers who say that they do not like it because it is not very well maintained. From what I understand, like French Ranch, Japanese investors own the golf course. They cannot be making much money, if any, so they must have purchased it for future development. Now that the moratorium on development has been lifted, thanks to supervisor Kinsey, is the golf course the next to be developed with a communal septic system? Is this where the 800 homes that the Supervisor mentioned are going, and has he been working with them or some other developer for these 800 homes?

Caltrans has on at least three occasions proposed four lanes (and once a freeway) on Sir Francis Drake Blvd. to Point Reyes Station The main argument against them was the freeze on building. This is now gone. Thirty-three homes means at least more than 60 cars on SFD, since many of these homes will end as renters (only some wealthy investor could afford a $500,000 three bedroom home), there could be an average of three or more cars per home, not to mention all the other Kinsey-proposed developments that will add hundreds of more cars to SFD!

Kinsey supporters should be happy. With the developments in French Ranch, Hamilton, the old Navy housing in Ignacio, Black Point, Point Reyes Station, St. Vincent's and the Silverado Ranch, we could be adding 10,000 more cars on the freeway, all approved by their Supervisor Kinsey. The face of Marin (especially the Valley), will be changed forever. I expect to see billboards on the freeway next! I was hoping my children would see cows grazing on the rolling hills off 101 in Marin and the Valley. I now do not see that this will happen. The existing ranches in the Valley can be worth many times more if they can also make a deal with Kinsey to develop them. It is sad. I have been in Marin all my life. Kinsey is the worst thing to happen to it.

One more point: in the Point Reyes Light it was mentioned that anti-Kinsey protest signs were on power poles. It was never mentioned that during his election his signs where littering everywhere, with two Kinsey signs on our private property without permission and one of them was on a telephone pole.
Kevin West
Forest Knolls

Calcium And Cancer

My name is Albert Wilson. I read your write up on Cancer (Sept. 1st 1999), it was very good and also very true. My Aunt died last month from cancer; she had just turned fifty on June 27th. She really got sick just weeks a few weeks after starting the radiation therapy.

My Aunt was a food microbiologist, she created most of Baskins Robins flavors. She thought that calcium had a lot to do with the cure to cancer, but she died before she had all the facts, but we had ran across some material that she thought would be the cure. She had it on tape I'll send you a copy. She thought he had all the facts.

Thank you. I really miss her, she died on my birthday.
Albert Wilson III
[email protected]

Drugs In Presidential Politics

Our present Commander in Chief admitted ten years ago to smoking pot, but he "didn't inhale." Our likely next Commander in Chief, Texas governor George Bush, has all but admitted to using cocaine when his father - himself a future President - was Ambassador to Red China and head of the CIA.

"What's next, pot parties at the White House? This attitude toward drugs is not just political, but is reflected in the policy of our Armed Forces," says Will Clark, a decorated disabled Vietnam veteran and presidential candidate. He claims to have turned in a dozen senior NCO's for drug dealing at White Sands Missile Range, the highest security installation in the Department of Defense. He was brutally harassed out of the service for doing so, and every attempt over the last fifteen years to clear his record has been ruthlessly turned down. "What's next - an official military "don't smoke, don't smell" policy?" he asks.

Clark has written an expose, available in paperback from Ingram Books, called Behold Leviathan. It's a sobering picture of cover-up, deception, and malice in many government - both federal and State of Texas - agencies, at the highest levels. This is his third book. He has two textbooks published with McGraw-Hill on energy conservation topics. Clark is a licensed professional engineer in a half dozen fields of engineering, a member in good standing in many professional societies.

The final word on Clark's military discharge is that only an Act of Congress can change anything. Consequently, he has formed his own political party - the American Federalist Party - and is starting a campaign for President, based on a platform of smaller and more responsible government.
Will Clark
Austin, Texas
Presidential Candidate- American Federalist Party

Saving My Husband's Life

You don't know me and may not care about my need for help, but I'm hoping someone out there will. My name is Tammy Bain and I'm doing everything I can, to save my husbands life. If that means contacting every Political leader, Head of State, Dignitary, Newspaper, and TV & Radio Station in the U.S. and around the world for help in getting my husband the help he needs from the Social Security Administration I will. I'm asking you to send Senator Durbin of Illinois a letter supporting him in his effort to help my husband At "[email protected]" or writing "Senator Durbin at 701 North Court Street Marion, IL. 62703" or by contacting anyone that you may know in the Government that has the power to help me save my husbands life.

I have contacted President Clinton, Vice President Gore, Mrs. Clinton, Mrs. Gore and 82 U.S. Senators asking for their help in my husbands case. I have send over 3,000 E-mails around the world asking for support in saving my husbands life and if it takes 3,000 more I'll send them.

Arthur has worked for the last 21 years. for the Jefferson County Highway Department in Illinois. About one year ago in August of 1998, after repeated tests and procedures at the doctor's office for many symptoms, he was finally diagnosed with advanced, untreatable cirrhosis of the liver due to Hepatitis C. After many other trips, to many doctors he was finally told by a specialist in Barnes Hospital at St. Louis, Mo. that the physical state of his liver was too far advanced with cirrhosis for any medical treatment. The Hepatologist's diagnosis concluded that due to the progressed state of liver damage (cirrhosis) caused by the hepatitis, all options for medical treatment would be ineffective.

He applied for Social Security Disability Benefits due to his physical/mental condition. He received a "determination" from the Social Security office stating specifically "it has been determined that Mr. Bain's condition doesn't significantly limit his ability to perform work-related activities." I find this determination to be completely unrealistic and absurd! Arthur suffers with incurable, untreatable Hepatitis C, advanced cirrhosis, hypertension, chronic fatigue, depression, frequent headaches, memory loss, mental confusion, constant indigestion, appetite loss, urinary problems, leg cramps, nausea, and frequent vomiting and diarrhea. The fact is, Arthur is dying unless some medical miracle happens. That medical miracle could very well be a liver transplant, but not for Arthur if he is denied Social Security Disability Benefits. It is my fear that as long as Arthur's deteriorated physical state cannot be recognized as "disabling," he will fall through the safety net that the Social Security Dept. can provide.

Senator Richard J. Durbin, said he would write a letter of support in Arthur's case and for Arthur to appeal to the,
" Office of Hearings and Appeals
Federal Building, Room 272
101 NW Martin L. King Blvd.
Evansville, IN. 47708 "
Administrative Law Judge as it seems completely senseless that he could be determined "not disabled" especially considering that the specialists say the liver damage is too severe for medical treatment.

Arthur served 3 years in the Navy and was in Vietnam, then came home and served 21 years working for Jefferson County in Illinois. Arthur has gave most of his life working for his Country, please help me save his life.

"Please" just a short "Personal" letter of support in our behalf to one or all of these e-mail addresses would help me and my husband in the fight to save his life. You can even e-mail this letter to one of these e-mail addresses. That way they will know I'm trying everything possible to get help for my husband before it is to late. "[email protected]"
"[email protected]"
"[email protected]"
"[email protected]"
"[email protected]"
Senator Durbin is trying to help us Please thank him for us.

Thank you for your time and any help you can give. Sincerely,
Tammy J. Bain
325 Caborn Ave.
Mt. Vernon, IL. 62864-5122
[email protected]

Is Astronomy Next?

As a Democrat and the founder of the Church of Reality I am disappointed in Vice President Al Gore's statement that Creationism should be taught in schools along with Evolution. Creationism is merely religious mythology. Other religions have different creation stories that are equally inaccurate. Evolution is science and the way it actually happened. It's the difference between myths and reality and in a science class we need to be teaching reality, the way it really is.

If we eliminate sciences from the classroom, as they did in Kansas, because it doesn't agree with the Bible, then we're going to have to get rid of Astronomy too. According to the Bible, the universe was created in 6 days about 7000 years ago and the Earth was created before the stars. This is clearly in conflict with scientific facts that estimate the age of the universe to be 15 billion years and the Earth to be 4 billion years. If the creation story in Genesis were true, the Hubbell Telescope wouldn't be able to see stars over 7000 light years away because the light from those stars wouldn't have got here yet.

Creationism is based on the Old Testament that was written by ancient Jews who made a guess at the origin of the universe based on the limited knowledge they had at the time. It has now been proven that their guess was wrong, and that as we move into a new millennium it's time that we give up old mythology and believe in what's real. We have come too far to go back to believing that world is flat. Church of Reality http://www.churchofreality.org If it's real, we believe in it!
Marc Perkel
Springfield Missouri 65806

Losing The Panama Canal

The Panama Canal is recognized by many as the most valuable water way in the world with over 13,000 commercial vessels using the Canal every year. About 65% of shipping leaving and entering the United States goes through the Canal. This eliminates eight thousand miles of ocean travel and is a tremendous saving in shipping cost. Economically, it has been one of the few business adventures in which the U.S. government has made a profit.

The most important thing about the Panama Canal is its military significance to the United States and the rest of the free world. Ninety-five percent of our naval vessels can use the canal saving two weeks of ocean travel. In times of emergency, this added travel time could make the difference between success or failure.

On December 31, 1999 this vital water way, built and paid for several times over by the U.S., is set to be handed over to Panama with the Communist Chinese already moving in to take control of the canal along with several of our military bases in the area. From this vantage point, the Communists cannot only prevent our ships from using the canal, they can also strike the U.S. mainland with missiles armed with atomic warheads.

The Panama Canal Treaties that made these conditions possible are a swindle and flawed in several ways. For one thing the Treaties passed by the Senate are not the same Treaties that Jimmy Carter secretly arranged with General Torrijos. These secret Carter-Torrijos agreements do not contain the provisions protecting U.S. interests that the Senate voted on. Dr. Charles Breecher, one of the State Department's most knowledgeable treaty authorities, called the Carter-Torrijos Treaties "the greatest fraud ever perpetrated against the American people." In addition to many other violations of law, the House of Representatives never voted on this disposal of U.S. property as called for in the Constitution. In other words the whole thing is a fraud and should not be allowed to be carried out.

In order for our Canal to be saved it will take a tremendous awaking of the American people, who in turn, must not allow our elected representatives in Congress to shun their sworn duties. For more information as to what you can do to help save this vital U.S. waterway see our web site at: WWW.LTAABOOKSANDAUDIO.COM.

Dee Zahner
Hesperia, CA 92345
[email protected]

Send a Cent Update

Thank you so much for publishing my letter. Just today, I began receiving feedback-$1.02! I am looking forward to more mail and intend to make good on my promise to keep the newspaper and it's readers updated.
Sally Blatchford 29 W Wooster Street Navarre OH 44662

Coastal Post Home Page